Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Advance ruling was barred where the same input tax credit question was already pending in enforcement proceedings against the applicant. The Authority held that, under the proviso to section 98(2), an advance ruling cannot be admitted on a question already pending in proceedings under the Act in the applicant's case. Because the jurisdictional authority had already initiated action on admissibility of input tax credit for construction of the hotel building, and the applicant did not dispute that fact, the application was rejected without any ruling on the merits.
Advance ruling was barred where the same input tax credit question was already pending in enforcement proceedings against the applicant. The Authority held that, under the proviso to section 98(2), an advance ruling cannot be admitted on a question already pending in proceedings under the Act in the applicant's case. Because the jurisdictional authority had already initiated action on admissibility of input tax credit for construction of the hotel building, and the applicant did not dispute that fact, the application was rejected without any ruling on the merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.